Australian Rugby / RA

[Pfitzy]

Darwin's work never seemed that amazing to me. It's basically - if you have two great players that play together regularly they will be better than two great players that don't. It's not exactly revolutionary.

He admits himself that if you have two average players with high cohesion they still probably won't be better than two great players with low cohesion.

Of course. The art is in determining exactly how much better when you're comparing what we have available.

I liken it to Moneyball: the old farts at one end of the table talking up someone because their girlfriend is ugly, versus the guy looking at the key metric.

 

[Penriff_boy]

I always said Eddie Jones is a con man , all he did was show up , promise a lot but deliver f all.

He then was trying to negotiate another contract right in the middle of the world cup. Questioned about it, he blatantly lied his head off.

Even after all that, a lot of you idiots still supported him.

 

[Derpus]

Of course. The art is in determining exactly how much better when you're comparing what we have available.

I liken it to Moneyball: the old farts at one end of the table talking up someone because their girlfriend is ugly, versus the guy looking at the key metric.

True - a little objectivity could only be good for the old fucks running the game.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Right, so let's assume Eddie flies straight to Haneda instead of landing at Kingsford Smith.

1) Larkham for coach.
2) Get Darwin's Gainline analytics into the room.
3) Get every eligible player in Australia on a zoom call to say the slate is clean.
4) Tweak the High Performance with appropriate Centralisation (get in Ponies, we're going to Successville).

Beat the Lions in 2025 3-zip, win both home RWCs in 2027 and 2029, and burn down a few existing shitty pathways while we're at it.

I'd like to see Brad Thorn be considered for head coach for a twelve month period to instill some passion/managed aggression and pride in the team after the shambles of the RWC. With the right (ie effective) Assistants and psychological expertise support he could just be what's needed to get the train back on the rails. Culture, confidence and self belief first before bringing in a head coach with the technical know how and game smarts to drive success on the field, whether that be Larkham, McKellar or someone else, maybe Jamie Joseph?

Otherwise, your steps 2) to 4) are on the money.

 

[Derpus]

Thoughts on an arrangement where all Super Rugby coaches take up roles with the Wallabies post Super Rugby? Seems the best use of extremely limited access to rugby IP/IQ and in line with a centralised model.

 

[Highlander35]

Thoughts on an arrangement where all Super Rugby coaches take up roles with the Wallabies post Super Rugby? Seems the best use of extremely limited access to rugby IP/IQ and in line with a centralised model.

If a big part of the perceived problem from guys like Kearney is the lack of coaching IQ is catapulting those guys into senior positions at a higher level the best solution?

 

[Ignoto]

Of course. The art is in determining exactly how much better when you're comparing what we have available.

I liken it to Moneyball: the old farts at one end of the table talking up someone because their girlfriend is ugly, versus the guy looking at the key metric.

At the same time, quantifying how much better a team or players that play more together is simply stuff.

What I'd like Ben etc to do is, how do we speed up cohesion when players cant play consistently in the same positions or teams.

We've known for years people and teams play better through experience and Ben's data is confirming that. But it's not really helping increase cohesion or getting teams to be more cohesive.

 

[Derpus]

At the same time, quantifying how much better a team or players that play more together is simply stuff.

What I'd like Ben etc to do is, how do we speed up cohesion when players cant play consistently in the same positions or teams.

We've known for years people and teams play better through experience and Ben's data is confirming that. But it's not really helping increase cohesion or getting teams to be more cohesive.

I think you have to pay extra for that feature/service. They have to make money somehow.

If a big part of the perceived problem from guys like Kearney is the lack of coaching IQ is catapulting those guys into senior positions at a higher level the best solution?

I guess not.

 

[bullocks]

Hi All

Can someone tell me why : if Eddie Jones leaves, Hamish still stays ? Hamish is the one that sacked Rennie 6 months out from a WC and employed Eddie. What processes/criterias did Hamish use to employ Eddie? Obviously did not work out and Eddie, if he goes, just slapped him and Oz Rugby in the face.
If Oz Rugby rely on people like Hamish to employ people of the character of Eddie Jones, who betrays Oz Rugby and leaves when the going gets tough ( majority own doing ), then the Head must roll as well.

Then you hit rock bottom and start again.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

Very good point. Hamish has done nothing to show he can guide Rugby into the future.

Dreams of being like Pony Boy but he can't get results.

 

[Derpus]

We keep hitting rock bottom and falling through.

 

[Tomikin]

Who gives a fuck if a young chap wants to play professionally. Half of the boys running in 1st XV probably want to be playing professionally. The question is are they good enough to play professionally? The NRL has always had (and probably always will have) more opportunities than rugby in Australia and yet that didn't stop Australia from being, at a minimum, top 3 in the world for probably close to two decades.

I have no problem with how many professional teams Australia wants to have so long as we have the talent to fill them.

The issue isn't so much having enough teams, it's having proper talent ID to try and retain the best talent early.

Personally, I've become rather indifferent to how many Super Rugby teams Australia has. After reading articles with Steve Anderson and David Nucifora who think that 5 teams are sustainable, I'm happy to listen to people who have way more experience and knowledge about these things. But what those guys also stress is the coaching ability that has to improve in the grades below Super.

Perhaps the focus on how many Super Rugby teams Australia has is a little misguided and 'apple cart before the horse' type of thinking?

Cool story, so what I want to do is have 8 teams and no kiwi teams. Then you can worry about the All Blacks, and we can get on with having a competition with unpredictability of outcome, that engages you know ... Australia's.

 

[Bullrush]

Cool story, so what I want to do is have 8 teams and no kiwi teams. Then you can worry about the All Blacks, and we can get on with having a competition with unpredictability of outcome, that engages you know ... Australia's.

Cool - we obviously want different things. Personally, I'd like a competitive Wallaby side but sure....keep your quaint little, 3-rate domestic competition and enjoy staying 10th in the world.

 

[hoggy]

Cool - we obviously want different things. Personally, I'd like a competitive Wallaby side but sure....keep your quaint little, 3-rate domestic competition and enjoy staying 10th in the world.

Alternatively, have a Super Duper competition over 6 countries, 5 continents, 27 different time zones, $Billions of dollars, elite level teams and still stay 10th in the world

 

[Tomthumb]

Cool - we obviously want different things. Personally, I'd like a competitive Wallaby side but sure....keep your quaint little, 3-rate domestic competition and enjoy staying 10th in the world.

One could argue this Super Rugby comp has brought us to 10th, as I don't remember Super Rugby being a thing when we won the World Cup in 1991

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

Existed in 1999.

 

[Bullrush]

Alternatively, have a Super Duper competition over 6 countries, 5 continents, 27 different time zones, $Billions of dollars, elite level teams and still stay 10th in the world

LOL…. yes, an idea that no one here has seriously proposed sounds dumb.

As opposed to the Super Rugby competition from which every Rugby World Cup winner, bar one has come from since 1996

 

[Tomthumb]

Existed in 1999.

True, but the argument being made is that Super Rugby somehow made Australia good at Rugby, which just isn't really true

And if Super Rugby is so good for Australian rugby, why have we reached our lowest ebb while playing in it?

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

I actually agree I'm just a wee bit sassy at the moment. Hope it's understandable

 

[hoggy]

LOL…. yes, an idea that no one here has seriously proposed sounds dumb.

As opposed to the Super Rugby competition from which every Rugby World Cup winner, bar one has come from since 1996

No its just that we can never have a genuine discussion about the game here because as soon as it is mentioned we get

".keep your quaint little, 3-rate domestic competition"